The re-election of Donald Trump to the White House brings forth, in tandem, the nightmare that is the appointment of Linda McMahon to the position of Secretary of Education. A longtime ally to Trump, McMahon is an avid business-governance operative who pushes for deregulation and pro-corporate policies at every turn. Having come from a background as head of the Small Business Administration in Trump’s first term and as co-founder of WWE, the roots are deep in for-profit endeavors that make this appointment to such a critical role potentially disastrous for higher education in the United States.
Her ideology, founded on pro-business and deregulation policies that have defined her career, would further turn U.S. education toward privatization, increasing costs and decreasing access, with the bottom line of profits over the public good.
Here's how McMahon's appointment could fundamentally reshape the landscape of American higher education, and not for the better.
Her career has been punctuated by her affinity for business interests, particularly those that benefit from deregulation. As co-founder of WWE, she helped build an international media empire symbolically exploiting low regulation for maximum profit. The WWE business model, with its routine exploitation of workers, aggressive marketing strategies, and cost-cutting measures in all other areas, really serves as a blueprint for McMahon's approach to governance.
Her time at the SBA further underlines her deregulatory stance. While many small business owners may have benefited from her policies, McMahon's tenure was also characterized by a failure to properly protect consumers, workers, and vulnerable industries against predatory practices. Upon being installed to head the SBA in 2017, McMahon drew fierce criticism over her oversight of a steep rise in predatory lending and a relaxation of restrictions toward industries that actively threatened the safety and welfare of the American public. Her deregulation methods could carry directly over into serving as Secretary of Education, given the need for oversight by traditional public entities, to say nothing of their private peers.
In many cases, McMahon views government intervention as an impediment to business rather than a guardian of the public interest. This approach threatens the very integrity of the education system in terms of affordability, quality, and equity.
One of the most immediate and concerning impacts McMahon's leadership at the Department of Education could have is to further increase the cost of higher education. Under a second Trump administration, McMahon could push to favor corporate-backed, for-profit educational institutions with her policies, further exacerbating the crisis of student loan debt and rising tuition costs.
Expansion of For-Profit Colleges
The strong ties that bind McMahon to the for-profit sector, especially in terms of for-profit colleges, are decidedly a cause for concern. Over time, these colleges have been criticized for their aggressive recruitment, high tuition rates, and low graduation completion rates. Under her leadership, an increase could be seen in such schools that operate with a business-first mentality that pushes students into expensive programs without regard for long-term student outcomes. The for-profit schools can charge exorbitant fees, leaving students with huge amounts of debt and limited employment opportunities upon graduation.
He could use the federal government to incentivize, fund, or deregulate such institutions. The consequences would be that more students are siphoned off into these low-quality, high-cost programs while public colleges and universities are further financially strained.
Cuts to Public University Funding
Due to the deregulatory stance of McMahon, funding for public universities facing financial difficulties would be further cut. Since these schools rely more on tuition for their revenue, the burden it places on them in raising costs becomes exponentially higher to cover their budgets.
The problem is, that without an avid push for federal funding, many public universities could inflate their tuition rates to compensate for these shrinking resources. For middle- and lower-income families, this makes a college education even less accessible and continues to solidify higher education as a privilege for the well-to-do.
Reduction of Federal Student Aid and Protections
If a philosophy by McMahon on education had to be predicted, it would include proposals for reducing federal student aid to current levels under programs like Pell Grants and subsidized student loans, which make college affordable for millions of Americans today.
She may further support cuts to the Department of Education's oversight of private lenders, thus leaving students at the mercy of these creditors. Without strong protections, students could be exposed to even greater financial risks, taking out loans with sky-high interest rates for degrees that ultimately don't pay off.
Deregulation of Online Education Providers
Online education has been touted as a potential solution to the affordability crisis, but without proper oversight, it can quickly become another avenue for exploitation. Having business experience in the digital media space, McMahon might be more inclined to deregulate the online education industry, letting companies sell low-value degrees for high prices. Without effective quality control, the proliferation of low-quality online programs would encourage students to invest in expensive credentials that don't improve their job prospects.
The Privatization of Education: A Shift Toward Corporate Interests
Part and parcel of the pro-business method that McMahon preaches is minimal government intervention in the economy, indeed in education. This will reflect a larger philosophy resident within the Trump administration: Privatize solutions to public sector failures. Sure enough, when McMahon takes on the mantle of Secretary of Education, there comes a renewed push further into privatization.
Charter Schools and Voucher Programs
One issue McMahon is most adamant about?
Expanding charter schools and school voucher programs to give way for public education monies to be utilized at private and religious schools. While proponents argue these are better options for families, critics maintain they drain much-needed resources from public schools and lead to further inequality in education. Privatization could result in low-income communities having fewer public schools available, making that particular educational landscape even less level.
Corporate Influence in Curriculum and Hiring
McMahon's ties to the business world could also influence educational curricula. There may be an increased push for curricula that prioritize corporate skills and workforce development over critical thinking, civic engagement, and other educational priorities that serve the public good.
This could lead to an increased focus on "career readiness" at the expense of deeper learning, resulting in a workforce that may be vocationally prepared but largely unprepared to handle a rapidly changing global economy.
Further Erosion of Teacher Protections and Salaries
With McMahon at the helm, it may get even worse for teachers' unions. Along with a move toward privatization, there could be more corporatization of education, leading to lesser pay, fewer benefits, and job insecurity for teachers. If McMahon's policies indeed give more prominence to charter schools and other non-unionized institutions, teachers in such schools may be robbed of those very protections that allow them to use their voice for better working conditions and improved educational standards.
Bottom Line: An Education System Run Like a Business, is a Dangerous Shift
The real and present danger presented by a possible Linda McMahon as Secretary of Education in a second Trump administration can best be demonstrated in this: her whole career is tinged with the aim for profit, deregulation, and privatization, so one could expect an America in which higher education becomes increasingly unaffordable, inaccessible, and based on corporate needs rather than the interests of students.
With tuition on the rise, decreased access to quality public education, and an increasing reliance on for-profit educational institutions, the American dream of affordable, high-quality education for all will continue to be further out of reach. Unless challenged, McMahon's policies have the potential to saddle millions of students with higher debt, fewer opportunities, and a college degree that no longer guarantees the pathway to success it once did. If McMahon's appointment is a cause for concern for anyone who truly cares about the future of American education, it could very well usher in a disquieting era where profit trumps the public good, and higher education becomes the privilege of the few as opposed to a right for the many.
Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore
Sources:
[1]-
[2]-
Comments